XMPP Council - 2019-08-07

  1. dwd

    Reminder that I'm on holiday, so won't be about for the meeting.

  2. Link Mauve

    Hi everyone.

  3. Link Mauve

    It’s about time.

  4. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, Kev, jonas’, ping.

  5. Ge0rG

    Sorry, I've been on the Autobahn.

  6. Link Mauve


  7. jonas’

    I’m here

  8. Ge0rG

    As I'm participating in a real-life meeting at the same time, I'd suggest somebody else chairs

  9. Link Mauve

    Kev said “I am also not here next week. Probably.”, so we can assume no quorum.

  10. Link Mauve

    Oh, so you’re still here?

  11. Ge0rG


  12. jonas’

    Link Mauve, can you chair?

  13. Link Mauve

    I was looking for things to put on an agenda, but sure.

  14. Link Mauve

    So, 1) roll call!

  15. jonas’

    I’m here

  16. Link Mauve

    I count three people, we have quorum.

  17. Link Mauve

    2) Agenda bashing

  18. Link Mauve

    Do we have an agenda?

  19. jonas’

    we have three PRs

  20. Link Mauve

    I counted three PRs.

  21. Link Mauve

    Anything else?

  22. jonas’

    not that I knew

  23. Link Mauve

    pep., did you do what you wanted to do, or do you want us to skip one of your PRs?

  24. Link Mauve

    pep., did you do what you wanted to do, or do you want us to skip your PR?

  25. pep.

    skip, I haven't submitted anything

  26. Link Mauve

    I suggest we skip the activity summary this week, as I don’t have it.

  27. Link Mauve

    Thanks pep.

  28. Link Mauve

    3) Add pubsub#public in Publish-Subscribe features (PR #806)

  29. Link Mauve

    Shall we vote?

  30. jonas’

    we can

  31. jonas’

    soo… I’m not sure on this one.

  32. jonas’

    doesn’t this require a feature on the pubsub service, too?

  33. Link Mauve

    I think so too.

  34. pep.


  35. pep.

    Say in the PR "if it's not present consider it $boolean"?

  36. jonas’

    pep., on the service, not on the node

  37. pep.

    I'm not sure why though

  38. pep.


  39. jonas’

    I’d want to know, with muclumbus for example, whether I’ll get non-public nodes in the search

  40. Link Mauve

    pep., so that users know that the service supports this new feature, and can avoid publishing something which can’t be made non-public.

  41. jonas’

    in that case I wouldn’t bother to index

  42. pep.

    jonas’, you wouldn't get them, the server would hide them

  43. jonas’

    false, if the server doesn’t support it

  44. pep.

    Then it's public

  45. jonas’


  46. pep.

    Just like now

  47. Link Mauve

    pep., but as an entity discovering it, you would need a feature to know whether “it’s public just like now”, or not.

  48. pep.

    I don't understand why you want that. A flag to False means it's hidden, a flag to True or no flag means public. As a publishing entity though you might want to know indeed

  49. pep.


  50. Link Mauve

    I’m on list, I’ll send that feedback to edhelas after this meeting.

  51. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, jonas’?

  52. jonas’


  53. pep.

    fwiw, a feature might not hurt for discovering entities, just that I don't think it's really useful

  54. Link Mauve

    4) XEP-0045: Add Tags configuration and metadata (PR #808)

  55. Link Mauve

    This one I haven’t reviewed at all, so I’m on list.

  56. jonas’

    +1 on that one

  57. Link Mauve

    5) Outstanding Votes

  58. Link Mauve

    I haven’t followed at all, do we have anything?

  59. pep.

    What about pubsub#rsm? When I said skip I was talking about all the rest(?)

  60. Link Mauve

    Oh, I didn’t understand that; 5) XEP-0060: Add a pubsub#rsm disco#info feature to clear confusion

  61. jonas’


  62. Link Mauve

    I’m +1 on this one, but you should register it with the registrar, in section 16.3, and maybe too section 10 too.

  63. pep.

    In coming changes I'm planning to rewrite rsm and order-by's "Dicovering support" sections, because these XEPs are not useful as is and it doesn't really make sense atm. pubsub#rsm is useful standalone though

  64. Link Mauve


  65. Link Mauve

    I’m fine with this change in 0060 standalone.

  66. Link Mauve

    Alright, let’s continue.

  67. Link Mauve

    6) Outstandinv Votes

  68. Link Mauve

    6) Outstanding Votes

  69. Link Mauve

    I can’t find anything, I’d like to remind Editor that some PRs have been voted on and should be merged or closed.

  70. Link Mauve

    7) Next Meeting

  71. Link Mauve

    Is +1W fine with the presents?

  72. Link Mauve

    I won’t be here in two weeks, fyi.

  73. Link Mauve

    8) AOB?

  74. Ge0rG

    sorry, I had a network outage. on-list everything.

  75. Link Mauve


  76. Ge0rG

    I've sent something to standards@ regarding Message Errors, and I'd appreciate Council feedback. But that can go on list as well

  77. jonas’

    none from me

  78. jonas’

    +1w wfm

  79. Ge0rG

    Also no video conference on Compliance Suite 2020 with Kev so far.

  80. Ge0rG

    +1W should work.

  81. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, alright, we can do that.

  82. Link Mauve

    9) End of Meeting

  83. Link Mauve

    Thanks all!

  84. jonas’

    thanks Link Mauve

  85. dwd

    If Georg wasn't there, was that meeting technically quorate? Oh well. 😁

  86. dwd

    Thanks for stepping in, Link Mauve.

  87. Link Mauve

    dwd, he was there at times though. ^^

  88. jonas’

    if only we had a protocol to indicate presence

  89. dwd

    At the beginning, which is probably all that counts.

  90. Ge0rG

    I'm very much sorry.

  91. jonas’

    in those IRL committees I was part of, we’d keep track of presence and stop the meeting (except AOB) when we lost quorum because people had to leave

  92. Link Mauve

    If only we had a way to track presences of participants in a MUC.

  93. Link Mauve

    If only we had a way to track the presence of participants in a MUC.

  94. pep.

    If only

  95. Ge0rG